Case law

In Re: Polar Bear Endangered Species Act Listing and 4(d) Rule Litigation - Mdl 1993

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 2011

(declining to establish a bright- line rule but noting that the agency must articulate a satisfactory explanation for its definition). … Moreover, established agency policy requires that in making a listing - 108 -  D.

Hemp Industries Association v. United States Drug Enforcement Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · May 3, 2021

Not so, however, when Congress has established a “special statutory review scheme.” Id. … At its core, they believe that the rule establishes that “the CSA’s registration requirements do continue to apply to entities handling . . . IHM and WHM.” Am. Compl., ¶ 83.

Garcia v. Acosta

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 24, 2019

Before hiring H-2A workers, an employer must obtain a certification from the Secretary of Labor establishing that (1) there is a shortage of U.S. workers who are “able, willing, and qualified” to “perform the labor or … The burden of establishing mootness, however, rests with the defendant.

Harper v. Walters

822 F. Supp. 817 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 28, 1993

Such conduct clearly violates the principles of Title VII which prohibit sexual harassment in the workplace. Id. at 4. … Having established that the EEOC Notices qualify as official reports, the question remains whether the broadcasts were complete and accurate representations of the Notices. 17 Plaintiff does not explicitly raise the question

Reckitt Benckiser Inc. v. Jackson

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 30, 2009

It takes the position that “once the collection and review of data are completed, and once a decision is reached as to which products qualify for reregistration, then the [section 136a-1] phases have been completed.” … Moreover, a writ of mandamus may issue only where “the duty to be performed is ministerial and the obligation to act peremptory, and clearly defined.

Community Nutrition Institute v. Bergland

493 F. Supp. 488 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 1980

It is established that such agency action deserves considerable deference when tested in the context of the rulemaking process. … Congress indicated clearly its definite belief that sale of non-nutritious foods in school contributes to plate waste and lack of participation in the child nutrition program. E. g., S.Rep.No.277, supra, at 17.

Wilderness Workshop v. Harrell

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 24, 2026

Nothing more is required to establish Heicher’s standing. See Sugar Cane Growers Co-op. of Fla. v. Veneman, 289 F.3d 89, 94–95 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Clearly the subject of this litigation—approval of the road—is “pertinent” to Wilderness Workshop’s “organizational purpose.” Ctr. for Sustainable Econ., 779 F.3d at 597.

Shaw v. U.S. Department of State

559 F. Supp. 1053 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 28, 1983

Exemption (b)(6) Section 552(b)(6) removes from coverage “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(6). … While information connected with a business or professional relationship does not qualify for the exemption, Chicago Board of Trade v.

Allergan, Inc. v. Crawford

398 F. Supp. 2d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 19, 2005

Allergan argues that cyclosporine is not an “antibiotic” drug because the substance actually suppresses the human body’s immune system, making the patient more and not less susceptible to microbial infection. … Courts “review scientific judgments of the agency ‘not as the chemist, biologist, or statistician that we are qualified neither by *22 training nor experience to be, but as a reviewing court exercising our narrowly defined

B & G INVESTMENT PARTNERS LP CORP. v. Thompson

391 F. Supp. 2d 246 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2005

The Board went on to find that the Providers were not qualified for the exception to the related party rule. A.R. 15. … See id. ' Finally, while the familial relationship of cousin does not establish the “irrefutable presumption” of relatedness for purposes of the regulations, the Medicare regulations clearly recognize that familial relationships

Cobb v. Astrue

770 F. Supp. 2d 165 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 17, 2011

Statutory and Regulatory Framework To qualify for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, the plaintiff must establish that she is “disabled.” 42 U.S.C. § 423 . … Jul. 30, 2009) (“When the evidence in the administrative record clearly generates an issue as to a particular listing and the ALJ fails to properly identify the [ljisting considered and to explain clearly the medical evidence

Ouachita Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Bostick

938 F. Supp. 2d 32 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 10, 2013

“[I]t is the burden of the party who seeks the exercise of jurisdiction in his favor clearly to allege facts demonstrating that he is a proper party to invoke judicial resolution of the dispute.” Idaho ex rel. … On this record, the Defendant-Intervenors failed to carry their “heavy burden” to establish the case is moot. C.

Humane Society of the United States v. United States Department of Agriculture

891 F. Supp. 2d 147 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 20, 2012

Congress directs the USDA to issue such a license “upon application therefor in such form and manner as [the USDA] may prescribe and upon payment of such fee established” pursuant to § 2153. 7 U.S.C. § 2133. … The parties agree that the Form’s Block 8 information qualifies as a “similar file[]” under Exemption 6. See Multi Ag Media LLC v. USDA, 515 F.3d 1224, 1228-29 (D.C.

Smiertka v. UNITED STATES DEPT. OF TREASURY, ETC.

447 F. Supp. 221 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 16, 1978

The agency justifies withholding these items on the claim that they do not qualify as “records” in a “system of records” within the meaning of the statute. Again, this Court agrees. … The party attacking the regulation carries the burden of “establish[ing] that it is inconsistent with the statute it implements.” Local 2047, supra at 485 .

Barnes v. District of Columbia

793 F. Supp. 2d 260 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 24, 2011

any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … Second, plaintiffs argue that the “Analysis of Releases” should be struck because it doesn’t qualify as an affidavit under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Pis.’ Mot. Strike [292] 6.

Albuquerque Publishing Co. v. United States Department of Justice

726 F. Supp. 851 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 11, 1989

The Sufficiency of the Vaughn Indices The burden of establishing that this information falls within one of these exemptions lies with the agency. Yeager v. … Clearly, “[official information that sheds light on an agency’s performance of its statutory duties falls squarely within that ... purpose.” Id.

Changji Esquel Textile Co. Ltd. v. Raimondo

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 4, 2021

Ultra vires judicial review is available without “dependen[ce] on the APA review process or on [a] waiver of sovereign immunity.” Fed. Express Corp. v. U.S. Dep’t of Com., 486 F. … It offers too thin a reed to support the conclusion that Congress has clearly resolved an issue.

Ruiz v. Vilsack

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 9, 2011

Because "[p]rocedural requirements established by Congress for gaining access to the federal courts are not to be disregarded by courts out of a vague sympathy for particular litigants," Baldwin, 466 U.S. at 152, courts … Supp. at 97 (dismissing plaintiff's suit as untimely where it was filed 97 days after issuance of the EEOC right-to-sue letter, and emphasizing that plaintiff's status as "a pro se litigant does not render him immune from

Cavagnuolo v. Becerra

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 18, 2026

And that mattered because the ALJ found that Section 102(e)(1) “clearly and unambiguously limit[ed] the definition of a” covered Part D drug to those being used for a medically accepted indication, meaning one approved … As to the Medicare claim, the Secretary’s decision here properly applied the legal standards established by statute.

Chesapeake Climate Action Network v. Export-Import Bank of the United States

78 F. Supp. 3d 208 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 21, 2015

Evid. 104(a) (“The court must decide any preliminary question about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible.”). … Sanzillo offers no explanation for the analytical gap, to the extent that his declaration could be read to suggest that his experience fills the void, such an explanation, standing alone, would clearly be inadequate.